SynthesisArchives of dermatological research2025
A comprehensive evaluation of Naftifine's efficacy and safety in treating dermatophyte infections; systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Archives of dermatological research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Dermatophyte infections, including tinea pedis (athlete's foot), tinea corporis (ringworm), and tinea cruris (jock itch), are widespread fungal infections that significantly impact global health and quality of life. Naftifine, an allylamine antifungal agent, is noted for its potent fungicidal activity, targeting fungal cell membranes by inhibiting squalene epoxidase. Additionally, Naftifine has anti-inflammatory and antibacterial properties, enhancing its therapeutic potential. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to comprehensively evaluate the efficacy and safety of Naftifine in treating tinea pedis, tinea corporis, and tinea cruris, focusing on clinical outcomes, cure rates, and adverse effects to provide a thorough understanding of its effectiveness in managing these infections. This meta-analysis followed the PRISMA guidelines and included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing naftifine's efficacy and safety in treating tinea pedis, corporis, and cruris. A systematic search was conducted in major databases from inception until February 9th, 2024. Eligible studies were selected based on predefined inclusion criteria, and data were extracted and analyzed using RevMan software. Seven multicenter RCTs were included in the meta-analysis. Naftifine demonstrated superior efficacy compared to vehicle control in terms of complete cure rate (RR = 5.83, 95% CI [3.73 to 9.10]) with no significant heterogeneity (I2 = 0%), clinical improvement [RR = 1.55, 95% CI (1.21-2.00)], and treatment effectiveness [RR = 3.93, 95% CI (2.44-6.33)] for tinea pedis. Similarly, for tinea corporis and cruris, Naftifine demonstrated significant efficacy compared to vehicle control regarding complete cure rate, mycological cure rate, clinical improvement, and treatment effectiveness. However, there was no significant difference in adverse events between Naftifine and the vehicle across all three conditions. Naftifine is an effective topical treatment for tinea pedis, corporis, and cruris, with a favorable safety profile with no significant difference in adverse events compared to the vehicle.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40053133What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.